You mean Michael Green its about the only thing he and the rest of the wooden tops cabinet are good at.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Johnson was as committed to Northern Powerhouse Rail as he had been to Crossrail
- Thread starter Vic
- Start date
Trevor Morley's Tache
Well-Known Member
This is the problem that a lot of people overlook. Even small infrastructure projects aren't easy undertakings.It's extremely difficult to have very high-speed rail here because of the geography and historic lines. The lines we already have are not straight and level for long periods so a train pelting by at 150mph+ would crash. The weather is also awful for 6-8 months of the year so chances are you won't be moving fast most of the time anyway.
We could build new lines as with HS2 but you still have the same problems and you cannot just bulldoze everything in your way to make the lines straight. They are trying but that's why the project is going to cost us all £100's of billions.
Rail here is just like our broadband network, it's based upon centuries old infrastructure which has to be replaced completely before it can be improved and that's expensive. For other countries it's different as they have less developed populations and could start almost from scratch in some cases.
I currently live in Lincoln, and anyone who's ever been here will know its a historic town, built on Roman infrastructure (founded in the 1st century AD). You can't just chuck a new lane next to the existing road. Until very recently the traffic through the centre of the town was fairly crap until the Eastern Bypass was opened.
The land upon which the bypass was built is not massively suited to just doing a bit of digging for the foundations and laying a bit of tarmac down, and I suspect this is a similar for any new rail infrastructure.
BobKowalski
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 May 2007
- Messages
- 21,511
It's extremely difficult to have very high-speed rail here because of the geography and historic lines. The lines we already have are not straight and level for long periods so a train pelting by at 150mph+ would crash. The weather is also awful for 6-8 months of the year so chances are you won't be moving fast most of the time anyway.
We could build new lines as with HS2 but you still have the same problems and you cannot just bulldoze everything in your way to make the lines straight. They are trying but that's why the project is going to cost us all £100's of billions.
Rail here is just like our broadband network, it's based upon centuries old infrastructure which has to be replaced completely before it can be improved and that's expensive. For other countries it's different as they have less developed populations and could start almost from scratch in some cases.
The UK has a more temperate climate than continental Europe. Less hot in the summer, less cold in the winter. Finland and Sweden has more high speed track and neither are noted for their warm climate. Equally it’s not so much about speed, but capacity. Upgraded and new infrastructure to allow more capacity, which is a bit like the internet. We have invested in and upgraded our internet network making it faster and able to carry more data. Over the decades we have failed to invest in rail. We keep failing to do so and keep falling behind. We also keep making excuses. Geography, history, a ‘more developed population’ etc., as if somehow we are unique. We aren’t. We are just good at making excuses for not doing things.
Citizen of Legoland
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 11,939
China are rich due to all their resources, have no opposition, cheap labour, no need to justify the costs and the government don't have to worry about failure to achieve an ROI - if they even set one.China built one of the worlds dams to generate electricity took them 4 year! They talking about 20 years for hs2 why so long I know channel tunnel took 16 years but that was a tunnel!
Apart from that it's a direct comparison.
I
I
inbetween
Guest
You need to make a fair comparison here because did the services in Finland or Sweden already exist albeit on antiquated old lines? If they had an old line already performing those services then there's no chance that they'd build a separate competing line purely for speed or even capacity.The UK has a more temperate climate than continental Europe. Less hot in the summer, less cold in the winter. Finland and Sweden has more high speed track and neither are noted for their warm climate. Equally it’s not so much about speed, but capacity. Upgraded and new infrastructure to allow more capacity, which is a bit like the internet. We have invested in and upgraded our internet network making it faster and able to carry more data. Over the decades we have failed to invest in rail. We keep failing to do so and keep falling behind. We also keep making excuses. Geography, history, a ‘more developed population’ etc., as if somehow we are unique. We aren’t. We are just good at making excuses for not doing things.
It's worth noting that the trains that we do have aren't slow, the Virgin trains for example get up to 130mph. There is just no need for an alternative service on a completely separate line that just so happens to go a bit faster, that is the idiocy of HS2.
The reality is that people will choose the cheaper option over the faster option and I'll bet my house that once HS2 opens it's trains will be empty and the Virgin type trains will continue to be packed to the rafters. For other countries there aren't two options so it's not a fair comparison.
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
The reality is that people will choose the cheaper option over the faster option and I'll bet my house that once HS2 opens it's trains will be empty and the Virgin type trains will continue to be packed to the rafters. For other countries there aren't two options so it's not a fair comparison.
ever been on the M6 toll? Same story - its only used by vehicles who's drivers are able to reclaim the toll - would be the same with HS2 trains - the only users will be business travellers who can reclaim the cost of an expensive ticket on their expenses
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
All that money will go on Crossrail 2. The London north to south route.
They don't like spending money outside of London let alone the North.
Crossrail 2 will be handy in as much as its northern stop will define where "The North" starts for the govt
MillionMilesAway
Well-Known Member
Crossrail 2 will be handy in as much as its northern stop will define where "The North" starts for the govt
I know you're joking, but the current plan does nothing of the sort. No-one thinks Broxbourne is 'the north'.
It's a very odd-looking line proposal - it'll relieve some pressure on one north London commuter line (Alexandra Palace area), and some in SW London. I don't know what they are actually claiming it will help with.
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
I know you're joking, but the current plan does nothing of the sort. No-one thinks Broxbourne is 'the north'.
It's a very odd-looking line proposal - it'll relieve some pressure on one north London commuter line (Alexandra Palace area), and some in SW London. I don't know what they are actually claiming it will help with.
It will help with job creation in Greater London - that seems to be all that matters to him
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
BobKowalski
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 May 2007
- Messages
- 21,511
You need to make a fair comparison here because did the services in Finland or Sweden already exist albeit on antiquated old lines? If they had an old line already performing those services then there's no chance that they'd build a separate competing line purely for speed or even capacity.
It's worth noting that the trains that we do have aren't slow, the Virgin trains for example get up to 130mph. There is just no need for an alternative service on a completely separate line that just so happens to go a bit faster, that is the idiocy of HS2.
The reality is that people will choose the cheaper option over the faster option and I'll bet my house that once HS2 opens it's trains will be empty and the Virgin type trains will continue to be packed to the rafters. For other countries there aren't two options so it's not a fair comparison.
You are still making excuses for not doing something and saying it is unfair to compare us to other European countries that have done something. European countries also faced challenges based on geography or history or politics and most have done something, recognising decades ago that high speed rail and greater rail capacity is an asset.
With climate change, rail is back in focus and Europe is looking at expanding rail usage for passengers and goods and high speed rail connections between major capitals. We keep doing studies and making plans about what we need to do and then never actually doing it or trying to ‘bodge it and make do’. I mean, anyone confident that these watered down rail plans for the North will ever materialise?
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
You are still making excuses for not doing something and saying it is unfair to compare us to other European countries that have done something. European countries also faced challenges based on geography or history or politics and most have done something, recognising decades ago that high speed rail and greater rail capacity is an asset.
With climate change, rail is back in focus and Europe is looking at expanding rail usage for passengers and goods and high speed rail connections between major capitals. We keep doing studies and making plans about what we need to do and then never actually doing it or trying to ‘bodge it and make do’. I mean, anyone confident that these watered down rail plans for the North will ever materialise?
Thats the issue Bob -Johnson lied about a commitment to deliver HS2 so why should we believe a commitment to these watered down proposals? Govt debt has soared and the economy is tanking - labour shortages - rising inflation - I have no confidence that anything promised yesterday will progress to completion
metalblue
Well-Known Member
China built one of the worlds dams to generate electricity took them 4 year! They talking about 20 years for hs2 why so long I know channel tunnel took 16 years but that was a tunnel!
China relocated 4m people destroyed over 1300 villages, 140 towns and 13 cities that were thousands of years old along with ancient monuments. They’ve since been plagued with earthquakes and landslides
We have to down tools for weeks on end if we find a newt.
So not really comparable is it? Unless you’d think wiping out 13 cities wouldn’t be a problem? Would certainly save having to worry about building a train line between them ;)
Making excuses for this government is what he does best tbf.You are still making excuses for not doing something and saying it is unfair to compare us to other European countries that have done something. European countries also faced challenges based on geography or history or politics and most have done something, recognising decades ago that high speed rail and greater rail capacity is an asset.
With climate change, rail is back in focus and Europe is looking at expanding rail usage for passengers and goods and high speed rail connections between major capitals. We keep doing studies and making plans about what we need to do and then never actually doing it or trying to ‘bodge it and make do’. I mean, anyone confident that these watered down rail plans for the North will ever materialise?
China relocated 4m people destroyed over 1300 villages, 140 towns and 13 cities that were thousands of years old along with ancient monuments. They’ve since been plagued with earthquakes and landslides
We have to down tools for weeks on end if we find a newt.
So not really comparable is it? Unless you’d think wiping out 13 cities wouldn’t be a problem? Would certainly save having to worry about building a train line between them ;)
No it’s not and new all that read up on it! They don’t piss about when they want something done!
BobKowalski
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 May 2007
- Messages
- 21,511
China relocated 4m people destroyed over 1300 villages, 140 towns and 13 cities that were thousands of years old along with ancient monuments. They’ve since been plagued with earthquakes and landslides
We have to down tools for weeks on end if we find a newt.
So not really comparable is it? Unless you’d think wiping out 13 cities wouldn’t be a problem? Would certainly save having to worry about building a train line between them ;)
Our base comparison is Europe. Germany lags behind France because they faced years of political and legal delays which had to be overcome. Similar countries with similar issues. What can be done there can be done here. It’s a question of wanting to and clearly we don’t. So, let’s stop producing reports recommending we need this or that rail link, promising to do it and then reneging.
I
I
inbetween
Guest
I don't think they are excuses, it's just reality. Building things is much harder here because more or less everything already exists albeit usually in an older (and crapper) form. You then have to get around the legal issues and problems of building.You are still making excuses for not doing something and saying it is unfair to compare us to other European countries that have done something. European countries also faced challenges based on geography or history or politics and most have done something, recognising decades ago that high speed rail and greater rail capacity is an asset.
With climate change, rail is back in focus and Europe is looking at expanding rail usage for passengers and goods and high speed rail connections between major capitals. We keep doing studies and making plans about what we need to do and then never actually doing it or trying to ‘bodge it and make do’. I mean, anyone confident that these watered down rail plans for the North will ever materialise?
In other countries they didn't have these pre-existing railway lines so they could build and dedicate them from scratch for high speed trains. Look at the Channel Tunnel, it didn't exist so they built it, it's silly to compare that with the victorian age Manchester to Leeds line.
I looked and more or less the entirety of the Italian high-speed train network was built within the last 20 years. However, one line in Italy travelling 96 miles cost them £6 billion but HS2 here travelling just 200 miles will apparently cost £107 billion. Clearly the technical problems of acquiring land and building the thing is a huge problem too.